Definition of a Truck/SUV

Talk about SCCV related topics here!
User avatar
gtivr4
Posts: 851
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 2:03 pm
Location: Essex, VT
Contact:

Re: Definition of a Truck/SUV

Post by gtivr4 »

My only issue with this:
"Final determination of a vehicles eligibility shall rest with the Event Chair."

Is that it sets up a precedence. The reason I assumed I could run my truck at ITTs this year is because they were allowed last year. Only very last minute was I told that I couldn't run it. That makes it much more frustrating to me. It would have been even worse if I hadn't made mention of my intentions to run on the forums, and had shown up to run last Sunday, blocking off the whole day to run and then being told I couldn't.

We also need to make sure to update our web site with this information so its obvious to everyone, not just people who frequent the forums. Its several YEARS out of date at this point.
Nathan Dana
1990 Miata, 1992 Volvo Cow, 1997 Sonoma, 2012 Locost 7
User avatar
lwheelock
Posts: 450
Joined: Mon Nov 22, 2004 2:27 pm
Location: Colchester

Re: Definition of a Truck/SUV

Post by lwheelock »

I agree it is an awkward scenario, we did have two jeeps show up on Sunday that we had to turn away.

I believe that this comes back around to having some clear concise rules that are posted for public review.
Laura
'11 FORD F150
'05 Legacy GT
'04 Swedish Minivan aka XC70
'04 STI when I'm allowed!
vwcorvette
Posts: 311
Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2003 10:18 pm

Re: Definition of a Truck/SUV

Post by vwcorvette »

I'm gonna play snob here.

I am a traditionalist. I understand the desire to include as many interested parties as possible, but this is the SPORTS CAR club of Vermont.

Butch's radical rig not withstanding we should be very careful about what we allow to run. If a vehicle is questionable then it should be put off until a discussion including more than just the event chair can be had and a determination made.

We do not have safety stewards like the larger organizations. They are the ones who make the final call. And, they are trained for these situations.

Perhaps the vehicle and driver could be given a trial run for base lining?

Ducks and runs for cover... :rock:
Geo

'75 Stingray. AKA, Sasha
(**--**)
'02 Jetta Wgn 1.8T tiptronic. MobyII
\ \=o=/ /
'79 Kawasaki KZ400h
d=~o
User avatar
gtivr4
Posts: 851
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 2:03 pm
Location: Essex, VT
Contact:

Re: Definition of a Truck/SUV

Post by gtivr4 »

So more like NEHA does with breakouts? There are some problems with that: Its a long way to go for a "trial run" for most people, people could easily sandbag.

I think there are some vehicles that are VERY obviously not allowed (any full size pickup, including things like SVT Lightnings) and their SUV cousins. Unless highly modified (see Butch).

I think the big grey area that we could relatively easily define ahead of time is the cute ute segment, which includes things like RAV4s, Foresters, CRVs etc.

And honestly while I enjoy watching Butch tear up the cones in a freaking blazer, I think he has stayed out of trouble largely because he is a good and experienced driver. That thing has been on two wheels more than I can count, and in the hands of an inexperienced driver, could easily tip right over. Our rules shouldn't be based on who is driving, but rather WHAT they are driving, and even heavily modified blazers aren't really safe, at least on sticky rubber IMO.
Nathan Dana
1990 Miata, 1992 Volvo Cow, 1997 Sonoma, 2012 Locost 7
User avatar
skivittlerjimb
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 6:56 pm

Re: Definition of a Truck/SUV

Post by skivittlerjimb »

Any car can tip over. I'd guess that Butch's Blazer would be only slightly more likely to tip over than a typical sedan with sticky rubber, were it not so stiffly sprung and with such stiff anti roll bars. That's just a guess, though.

I do think that there is room for lower center of gravity SUVs at Ice Time Trials due to the much lower friction coefficients, but it is a slippery slope in terms of where you draw the line. I felt extremely comfortable driving my body-on-frame semi-cute ute Suzuki XL-7 at our only ITT last year (and have also felt comfortable driving it in two Buffum rallies), and would have felt very comfortable driving a Tacoma or Ranger or RAV4, etc., but where is the line drawn? Is it worth having different rules on what's allowed for winter autoxs and ITTs than we do for autoxs? It's a least worth looking into what other clubs allow.

For one, the AMEC folks use the wording "no trucks or Sport Utility Vehicles will be entered to race." Not sure if this is due to rollover chance, or due to height differential between the racing cars since their events are wheel-to-wheel, or due to the typically higher weights of trucks and SUVs and the implications of that on ice. Really, for ITT vehicle exclusion rules, overall weight and height restrictions would seem to be more appropriate than excluding entire classes of vehicles based on some members of that class of vehicles not being suitable.
-Jim B.
'92 GVR4 280/1000
User avatar
gtivr4
Posts: 851
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 2:03 pm
Location: Essex, VT
Contact:

Re: Definition of a Truck/SUV

Post by gtivr4 »

skivittlerjimb wrote:For one, the AMEC folks use the wording "no trucks or Sport Utility Vehicles will be entered to race." Not sure if this is due to rollover chance, or due to height differential between the racing cars since their events are wheel-to-wheel, or due to the typically higher weights of trucks and SUVs and the implications of that on ice. Really, for ITT vehicle exclusion rules, overall weight and height restrictions would seem to be more appropriate than excluding entire classes of vehicles based on some members of that class of vehicles not being suitable.
So they don't define it any better than we do. I do like the idea of some sort of height/weight/wheelbase definition. That could potentially cover 90% of the issues if we can all agree on what those limits are.
Nathan Dana
1990 Miata, 1992 Volvo Cow, 1997 Sonoma, 2012 Locost 7
stig
Posts: 173
Joined: Wed Apr 22, 2009 10:56 pm
Location: Waterbury, VT
Contact:

Re: Definition of a Truck/SUV

Post by stig »

So out of curiosity (before I decide to do some stuff), what would we think about a Legacy wagon with Forester suspension (lifted 1-2") showing up at an ITT?
User avatar
pdudley42
SCCV President
SCCV President
Posts: 1015
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 7:13 pm
Contact:

Re: Definition of a Truck/SUV

Post by pdudley42 »

My .021, it's a car.
Paul Dudley #42

There are no accidents; only collisions.
User avatar
BugEyeRex
SCCV Board Advisor
SCCV Board Advisor
Posts: 1209
Joined: Mon Apr 11, 2005 7:52 am
Location: Colchester, VT

Re: Definition of a Truck/SUV

Post by BugEyeRex »

I did some calculations based on SCCA way of determining potential rollover and it was passed according to the chart. I assumed is was the tallest legacy wagon available and added 2" to the height then used the skinniest track of the legacy wagon. According to SCCA spec it was easily acceptable. I ran a few suv, jeep, and truck specs and none passed.
Chris SCCV #169

93 Blue Impreza Wrx conversion (toy)
02 Blue WRX Wagon (toy)
98 Green Civic 4dr (basic transport)
08 Red GTI 4dr (toy when given permission from the boss)
User avatar
gtivr4
Posts: 851
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 2:03 pm
Location: Essex, VT
Contact:

Re: Definition of a Truck/SUV

Post by gtivr4 »

Is there a link to the calculator? That would help tremendously!
Nathan Dana
1990 Miata, 1992 Volvo Cow, 1997 Sonoma, 2012 Locost 7
Post Reply